xql_get_query_results

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the 1000-result maximum, lack of pagination, and the existence of a streaming alternative, plus license requirements. However, it does not mention non-destructive read-only semantics, potential PENDING status returns, or error behavior, leaving some gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with a clear opening statement, informative notes, a link for further reading, license info, endpoint, and an example. It is slightly verbose but every section contributes useful context, and the information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers the key operational constraints (result size, stream alternative, license), and provides an example. It does not explain return statuses or how to handle PENDING, but the schema covers pending_flag semantics, so the overall context is fairly complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description provides an example request body illustrating the nested request_data structure with query_id, pending_flag, limit, and format. The input schema already has detailed descriptions for these nested properties, so the description adds marginal semantic value beyond the schema, mostly clarifying structure via the example.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Get XQL query results' and 'Retrieve results of an executed XQL query API', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting that it only works with queries initiated by start_xql_query and that results over 1000 require the Stream API.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: it only works with XQL queries from start_xql_query, and explicitly directs users to Get XQL query results Stream for responses over 1000 results. Also mentions parallel query quota limits, giving practical usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.